Hi David. On 2018/05/10 18:56, David Rowley wrote: > On 10 May 2018 at 17:42, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> Patch is good. >> >> The cause of this oversight is the lack of comments to explain the >> original coding, so we need to correct that in this patch, please. > > Thanks for looking. > > Yeah, the comments do need work. In order to make it a bit easier to > document I changed the way that check_partition_constr is set. This is > now done with an if/else if/else clause for both COPY and INSERT. > > Hopefully, that's easier to understand and prevents further mistakes. > > Patch attached.
Thanks. I like this patch, both the rewording of comments and the code revision. By the way, + !resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionRoot) This should be resultRelInfo->ri_PartitionRoot == NULL, because the above gives an impression that ri_PartitionRoot is a Boolean. Thanks, Amit